IAM FLEET SERVICE

[Henderfuzz]

Henderfuzz,
You sound like you drank too much kool-aid. To say that we need to take what we can now. What about 5 years from now? If we accept a T/A that is extended untill 2012. We start negotiations then so add 2 ar 3 years to that for anything substantial to happen with negs. Like the last T/A we would have been stuck at I think $20.57 until 2015 or so. I am not willing to accept that. We should be at $23 or $24 by 2012. Plus I am not willing to sell out 19 more stations for $19.00 an hour. Maybee you are but I am not. You will probably say "look at the BIG Picture", I have, and I do not like the way the company/I'll Ask Management have sold us out. So keep drinking your kool-aid and selling yourself short. I will vote NO to anything that resembles the last T/A. That is a fact!

Well Im not going to keep the harping on the last agreement becasue there is nothing we can do about it. However I do want to point out that it most likley would not have draged out as you say considering the provision in the agreement as to snapback. Artical 31 makes it clear. It was and incentive for the IAM and the company to make a new agreement. Most never really read that part so it is forgotton by most here on this board. Yes maybe the pay was not the best and I agree 20 per hour would be better but that agreement had some good points as well as some flaws.

 

[orioleman]

Fuzz,
"I will say this I dont want to see the last T/A either there are things I too would like to see as improvments in it as well, sick pay, and added vacation as well."

correct me if I am wrong . BUT weren't you one of the biggest cheerleaders for the last t/a, kept telling us HUB guys that we were wrong

and thinking about ourselves. I don't know maybe I have you confused with someone else.


"I will also remind you the last T/A was overseen by a nutral arbitrator much like would happen if we continue to reject what is offered us."
sorry amigo. the last t/a WAS NOT OVERSEEN BY A NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR the COC was . 2 different animals altogether

"I do want to point out that it most likley would not have draged out as you say considering the provision in the agreement as to snapback. Artical 31 makes it clear."

snapbacks you refer to are after 2012 when the NEW amendable contract would be up. NOT WAITING FOR THAT

Fuzz,
get with Mike W your union leader in DFW .. You say management runs all over you guys.. WORK BY THE IAM CONTRACT
work SAFE. There is no need for there to be a time when there is 3 flights on the ground and 3 guys working them . UNLESS you guys
allow that to happen. 1 plane 3 guys if the other 2 take delays .. so be it.

 

[orioleman]

Joe,
Keep up the fine work your doing . You are bringing awareness to alot of folks that need to know .


your a fine union member .. 😀 😀 😀 😀

 

[Tim Nelson]

Well I can see that I continue to stir a lot of anger with my opinions. Which is fine because as the old saying goes everybody has one. I will say this I dont want to see the last T/A either there are things I too would like to see as improvments in it as well, sick pay, and added vacation as well.
I will also remind you the last T/A was overseen by a nutral arbitrator much like would happen if we continue to reject what is offered us.
As for drinking the koolade well I will tell you I dont, the way our station is run is a joke. As I have stated before its now under one buget just as if we all work together. That means the mangment looks at us as one group as if we all work all flights. There are many a day where we can have 3 flights on the ground and there are 3 yes 3 east agents working the ramp. As I said its a joke.
Once again I understand you guys in the hubs dont really understand this which is fine. I do understand what my job is worth and what my 25 years is worth. If I were to really get what Im worth based on what was taken away from me I should ask for 25 dollars an hour but Ive come to understand that times have change forever. Maybe someday it will get better Im just no going to keep hopping it will all come back before I want to retire.
Also if you have been reading the papers latley USAiways right now is not even on anybodys radar as far as a merger partner is concerened. So you guys keep thinking this and who knows in 3 or 4 years and we still have nothing well than maybe you will understand.

Fuzz,
the last agreement sucked, I'm not following why this is still an issue with you?
87% of the east thought it sucked, 42% of the west thought it blowed. Who cares if there was a neutral mediator? Bottom line was the contract sucked, like real bad.

Get over it already.

regards,

Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman 1487 ORD

 

[Tim Nelson]

Fuzz,
"I will say this I dont want to see the last T/A either there are things I too would like to see as improvments in it as well, sick pay, and added vacation as well."

correct me if I am wrong . BUT weren't you one of the biggest cheerleaders for the last t/a, kept telling us HUB guys that we were wrong

and thinking about ourselves. I don't know maybe I have you confused with someone else.


"I will also remind you the last T/A was overseen by a nutral arbitrator much like would happen if we continue to reject what is offered us."
sorry amigo. the last t/a WAS NOT OVERSEEN BY A NEUTRAL ARBITRATOR the COC was . 2 different animals altogether

"I do want to point out that it most likley would not have draged out as you say considering the provision in the agreement as to snapback. Artical 31 makes it clear."

snapbacks you refer to are after 2012 when the NEW amendable contract would be up. NOT WAITING FOR THAT

Fuzz,
get with Mike W your union leader in DFW .. You say management runs all over you guys.. WORK BY THE IAM CONTRACT
work SAFE. There is no need for there to be a time when there is 3 flights on the ground and 3 guys working them . UNLESS you guys
allow that to happen. 1 plane 3 guys if the other 2 take delays .. so be it.

the last contract was overseen by a neutral mediator, but who gives a rat's a$$ about that when both sides are management? Negotiations need to be overseen by workers with balls, not eunichs. That's the problem.

And the snapbacks were really just IOU's. Parker will have to clean things up or just wait till 2009. Fleet has something he wants......a transition. If he doesn't want one then the IAM should have been in section 6's for the west like yesterday just in case.

regards,
Tim Nelson
IAM Local Chairman 1487, ORD

 

[pit_till_death]

Well I can see that I continue to stir a lot of anger with my opinions. Which is fine because as the old saying goes everybody has one. I will say this I dont want to see the last T/A either there are things I too would like to see as improvments in it as well, sick pay, and added vacation as well.
I will also remind you the last T/A was overseen by a nutral arbitrator much like would happen if we continue to reject what is offered us.
As for drinking the koolade well I will tell you I dont, the way our station is run is a joke. As I have stated before its now under one buget just as if we all work together. That means the mangment looks at us as one group as if we all work all flights. There are many a day where we can have 3 flights on the ground and there are 3 yes 3 east agents working the ramp. As I said its a joke.
Once again I understand you guys in the hubs dont really understand this which is fine. I do understand what my job is worth and what my 25 years is worth. If I were to really get what Im worth based on what was taken away from me I should ask for 25 dollars an hour but Ive come to understand that times have change forever. Maybe someday it will get better Im just no going to keep hopping it will all come back before I want to retire.
Also if you have been reading the papers latley USAiways right now is not even on anybodys radar as far as a merger partner is concerened. So you guys keep thinking this and who knows in 3 or 4 years and we still have nothing well than maybe you will understand.

Fuzz,

If the company, and the airline industry as a whole, is in such bad shape, why do we continue to make profits with oil at $70, $80, even $90 a barrell? Why is US renegotiating new contracts with execs? Why does US continue to hire new VP's with huge salaries? Didn't US say that it would not make a profit if oil goes over $60 a barrell? Well, that was about $700 million ago in profits over the last couple of years.

Fuzz, this company, and the IAM has gotten everybody brainwashed to believe that we are still in bankrupcy and still losing money. If you think that you are only worth $19/hr, why don't you take your 25 years and find a job that pays that? We, on the other hand, will fight for what we are worth. And, if the current IAM leadership won't fight for us, we will vote them out and find other union brothers that will.

We have nothing to lose.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

The company is liberal in their spending with new routes, new planes, refurbishing planes, new technology, and new upper management. Doug has no problems finding resources for these things.

But when it comes time to paying their employees, it seems they've run out of money all of a sudden and they are trying to be ultra conservative for when the money stops rolling in. (Which it won't) Why should we give concessions while the company takes risks on ventures that will fill the pockets of investors, stockholders, and upper management while we get their table scraps?

NO reason for any of us to feel as if there's any reason to settle for anything less than above average. Both the company and union know that wages are a big expense, and the union has chosen to give up what we deserve to appease a greedy, and inept group of half-wits to gamble with other industry giants.

If they mess up bad enough, we are all out of a job guys. Might as well get as much as you can when you can.

 

[orioleman]

hey chill out,
GREAT POST . for once I totally agree with you . YOU are 100 percent correct.
NOW your homework assignment is to get your brother and sisters in PHX onbrd with that attitude.

with PHX on board 100 percent the fleet service group can accomplish many things..

 

[necigrad]

The company is liberal in their spending with new routes, new planes, refurbishing planes, new technology, and new upper management. Doug has no problems finding resources for these things.

It's not "finding resources". With the exception of management, all those items can have a profit directly associated to them justifying the expenditures. Companys, no matter how poorly run, don't "buy buy buy" because they can. They are still responsible to the shareholders. Those new aircraft are to support new and expanded routes. A cost analysis has been done to determine that it's justified. The planes need to be refurbished. They look like #### now. I don't know what you're specifically speaking of for new technology, but rememeber that technology is ever changing. Much of the tech costs are merger related, and a lot more is just obsolesence.

The management point may or may not be valid. A good manager in a major corporation can generate far more profit or savings then his/her salary and benefits. That makes it a good move IF those savings/profits are realised. New blood also brings new ideas. Bringing in management from within the system to CHQ also carries in a recent perspective on what it's like "out there". I'm not saying that any position is specifically a good or bad idea. I'm saying that money spent on management isn't necessarily money that could have gone elsewhere.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

So why do you seperate employees in your arguement? Are we not a worthwhile investment? Remember: You get what you pay for, and if you lower the bar as far as employee benefits go, then you will get a poor quality workforce. I think none of you can argue the fact that there are some real morons out there working, and there are sharp people out there. When you work as a team at ANYTHING the weakest person can bring you down as a whole. What if we had a workforce that gave 100% all day, every day? I KNOW things would go a lot more swiftly. I

Reflect on how all workgroups treat eachother. Now imagine a workplace where we all worked and communicated to get an aircraft out on time in a friendly and professional manner. We would see a lot of problems disappear and we could then move onto the next problem that plagues us.

I don't argue with you that the items I listed above were good investments, long overdue - I'll give you that, but without any of us to fly, fill, and board, the planes, then appearances and routes mean NOTHING.

Doug Parker has made a hierarchy in a successfull business, and he has placed us at the top. (Bottom) The whole thing is bound to crumble if there's no balance.

 

[Jester]

So why do you seperate employees in your arguement? Are we not a worthwhile investment? Remember: You get what you pay for, and if you lower the bar as far as employee benefits go, then you will get a poor quality workforce. I think none of you can argue the fact that there are some real morons out there working, and there are sharp people out there. When you work as a team at ANYTHING the weakest person can bring you down as a whole. What if we had a workforce that gave 100% all day, every day? I KNOW things would go a lot more swiftly.

I will agree with much of what you say, but there are limits.

For example, there are plenty of 10 year employees I would trade for a new hire because, I have a chance of getting some productivity out of the new hire whereas the "experienced" agent I would need to carry the entire shift. No amount of extra pay is going to motivate these people any further and with an union protecting even on-duty drunks, replacing them would be impossible, thus so much for the "100% all day, every day" outcome. You know the types: The bin-avoidance guys, The newspaper-coffee-cup-walking-around guys, The chalk-kicking-water-filling-ground-power-connecting guys, The run-one-flight-per-a-shift guys, and The download-youporn.com-wireless-laptop guys.

Secondly, from a management perspective, would a 20-year employee be that much better than a 5-year employee? Probably not, but the pay difference would be substantially higher. So the productivity benefits you suggest probably wouldn't happen. Parker is sadly right... the company is not well-suited for a ramp full of topped-out employees when people with similar abilities (but less time) could do the job for far less. There is reason why Southwest offered buy-out options to employees because the experience lost along with one time cash incentive was cost less than the higher wages being paid.

So prognosticates Jester.

 

[pit_till_death]

I will agree with much of what you say, but there are limits.

For example, there are plenty of 10 year employees I would trade for a new hire because, I have a chance of getting some productivity out of the new hire whereas the "experienced" agent I would need to carry the entire shift. No amount of extra pay is going to motivate these people any further and with an union protecting even on-duty drunks, replacing them would be impossible, thus so much for the "100% all day, every day" outcome. You know the types: The bin-avoidance guys, The newspaper-coffee-cup-walking-around guys, The chalk-kicking-water-filling-ground-power-connecting guys, The run-one-flight-per-a-shift guys, and The download-youporn.com-wireless-laptop guys.

Secondly, from a management perspective, would a 20-year employee be that much better than a 5-year employee? Probably not, but the pay difference would be substantially higher. So the productivity benefits you suggest probably wouldn't happen. Parker is sadly right... the company is not well-suited for a ramp full of topped-out employees when people with similar abilities (but less time) could do the job for far less. There is reason why Southwest offered buy-out options to employees because the experience lost along with one time cash incentive was cost less than the higher wages being paid.

So prognosticates Jester.

How does that suit feel Jester??? Do you ever wonder why US was one of the best quality products in the industry??? People loved USAir, and the employees loved working here. You used to say that "I work for USAir, and people would go, ""OOH, that's a good job, you're lucky."" You know why????? MONEY. People were paid fairly and went the extra mile. PERIOD. You used to feel like you were worth what you were paid. Again, I don't EXPECT to be paid at the top tier of the industry, but industry standard, YES. Again, we are not in bankrupcy any longer, execs are renegotiating their contracts, vp's are being hired, and the balance sheet is WAY in the black. We should not be bottom feeders. And don't even try to compare US to WN. Thier profit sharing and 401k and other incentives are not even close to ours. It's like comparing apples to rocks. And by the way, take a look at how many WN guys took the buyout. NOT MANY. You know why????? They are paid way too well to leave.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

Bravo Pit! Here we see how polarized you guys are in your thinking. To be honest. I would rather have a guy like PIT representing us than Jester because he recognizes the value of the workforce. Jester, you are just a bottom feeder like the rest of us. there's no reason to be so concessionary in your thinking. If you make people understand this, then we are doomed to substandard working conditions. WN KNOWS they have to keep their employees happy because a happy employee means good customer service and work ethic.

CEO Herb Kelleher, who founded Southwest, was deeply committed to a philosophy
of putting employees first. If theyare happy, satisfied, dedicated, and energetic, they'll
take real good care of the customers. When the customers are happy, they come back.
And that makes the shareholders happy. Southwest's walls were filled with
photographs of its employees. More than 1,000 married couples (2,000 employees)
worked for the airline. The average age of a Southwest employee was 34 years.
Southwest employees were among the highest paid in the industry and the company
enjoyed low employee turnover relative to the airline industry.

Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth

There you have it. We are the first impression on a customer. If you don't belive, Jester, that the employee is just as important as the routes, CEO pay, new planes, and quality of food, then I have to question how well YOU work and interact in the workplace. Are you one of these soul-less robots who just walks around the ramp?

 

[Jester]

PIT, you reply with the following:

"How does that suit feel Jester??? Do you ever wonder why US was one of the best quality products in the industry??? People loved USAir, and the employees loved working here. You used to say that "I work for USAir, and people would go, ""OOH, that's a good job, you're lucky."" You know why????? MONEY. People were paid fairly and went the extra mile. PERIOD. You used to feel like you were worth what you were paid. Again, I don't EXPECT to be paid at the top tier of the industry, but industry standard, YES. Again, we are not in bankrupcy any longer, execs are renegotiating their contracts, vp's are being hired, and the balance sheet is WAY in the black. We should not be bottom feeders. And don't even try to compare US to WN. Thier profit sharing and 401k and other incentives are not even close to ours. It's like comparing apples to rocks. And by the way, take a look at how many WN guys took the buyout. NOT MANY. You know why????? They are paid way too well to leave."

Allow me to retort:

1) Do you realize that when I spoke of productivity, did you forget that Southwest will turn 6-7 mainline flights in 8 hours versus 4 or less for a typical US ramper?

2) Do you forget that Southwest turns their planes in 25-30 minutes EVERY flight versus our ground times approaching one hour and the scheduled quick turn of 30 minutes being the exception?

3) Do you think Point 1 and 2 leads to greater productivity (and profits), not to mention, their people can do it while I doubt most of us could do this? (Maybe Chill's assertion of the average age of a Southwest employee being 34 should tell you something.)

4) Do you understand that the industry has changed in the past 20 years and the glory days of rampers being paid as much as nurses ended with de-regulation in the late 70s?

5) Do you realize that low-skilled, low-education jobs are typically not going to make the big bucks in a competitive market, especially in a global economy?

6) Do you realize that US Airways filed bankruptcy twice in large part due to high labor and benefit costs?

7) Do you realize that if not for Southwest's fortuitousness fuel hedge, they would have lost money regardless of their industry high productivity and progressive management thinking?

8) Do you realize that airlines that have tried to mirror the Southwest model of P2P are in the dust bin of business history?

9) Do you realize that your cheerleading for "being paid fairly and going the extra mile" will fall on deaf management ears?


There's your reality check, and if you want to bust ass to have the Southwest experience, then you should apply.

So chastises Jester.

 

[pjirish317]

Jester,
IMO if the company can afford to add VP's , routes, overhaul A/C, and such, then they can afford to give us back some of what we were forced to give up for them. That is my gripe with this whole situation. The company, and in particular, Dougweiser, puts himself and the shareholders first when it comes to $$$$ issues. When our inept N/C stops agreeing with the company and starts listening to to people that pay their salaries, then we might get somewhere. Untill then we will continuously get concessionary CBA's to regect. We should not have to "give" anything back to the company for an acceptable agreement.